Rise Gold trial schedule delayed til March

Executive Summary

• Rise Gold Corp. has been notified that the oral arguments for its writ of mandamus against Nevada County, California, have been delayed from January 9, 2026, to March 6, 2026, at the court's own initiative.
• The legal action seeks to compel the county to recognize Rise Gold's vested right to operate the historic Idaho-Maryland (I-M) mine, which the county previously rejected by claiming mining activities ceased in 1956.
• Rise Gold argues that under the 1996 Hanson Brothers ruling, cessation of use does not constitute abandonment, and cites four recent California county decisions where vested rights were recognized despite mining ceases of 53 to 75 years.

Key Details

• Trial Delay: Oral arguments for the writ of mandamus were originally scheduled for January 9, 2026, but were delayed by the Superior Court of California for the County of Nevada until March 6, 2026.
• Legal Basis: Rise Gold filed the writ on May 13, 2024, seeking to compel Nevada County to follow applicable law and grant recognition of its vested right to operate the I-M mine without a new permit.
• Vested Right History: The I-M mine produced 2.4 million ounces of gold at an average mill head grade of 0.50 ounce per ton. It operated before, during, and after the county adopted its zoning code, establishing a vested right.
• County's Rejection: On December 14, 2023, the Nevada County Board of Supervisors rejected Rise's vested rights petition, stating that "all mining activities at both the Brunswick and Centennial sites had ceased by 1956."
• Legal Precedent Dispute: Rise argues the county ignored the California Supreme Court's 1996 Hanson Brothers ruling, which states that "cessation of use alone does not constitute abandonment" and that the county must show clear and convincing evidence of an "intention to abandon."
• Briefing Timeline:
  • Sept. 6, 2025: Rise filed its initial brief in support of the writ.
  • Nov. 18, 2025: The county replied, arguing vested rights protect only existing, lawful uses in operation, not those ceased nearly 70 years ago.
  • Dec. 5, 2025: Rise replied, citing four recent California county cases where vested rights were recognized despite mining ceases ranging from 53 to 75 years.
  • Dec. 17, 2025: The county filed a brief demanding the court ignore the four cited cases, claiming they were not provided to the board and that new evidence is not permitted in reply papers.
  • Dec. 23, 2025: Rise clarified that the decisions were cited as persuasive legal authorities, not factual evidence, and noted the county's attempt to delay the case which has been pending for over 1.5 years.
• Court Action: The court announced the delay on the late afternoon of January 8, 2026, providing no reason for the action.

Notable Quotes

• David Watkinson, CEO of Rise Gold: "We are frustrated that the court chose to delay resolution of the writ. However, we recognize that the administrative record supporting the writ is voluminous and that this case has broad implications for property rights in the whole State of California."